Delhi Court August 2018 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Union of India vs.rama Paper Mills Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) (COMM) 165/2018 Date of decision:06. 08.2018 UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate. versus RAMA PAPER MILLS LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Manav Vohra and Mr. Sidhant Kapur, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % CAV7042018 Since the counsel for the caveator has put in appearance the caveat stands discharged. CM APPL. 31123/2018 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. FAO(OS) (COMM) 165/2018 & CM APPL. 31121 (for stay) The appellant-Union of India which appeals the decision of the learned Single Judge rejecting its objections to the award pursuant to FAO(OS) (COMM) 165/2018 Page 1 of 6 an Agreement of 11.04.2013 (made with the respondent-Rama Paper Mills Limited - hereinafter claimant) urges two grounds in support of its plea that the award was patently illegal and the learned Singl...
Ram Kumar vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
#75 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:06. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 8204/2018 RAM KUMAR ........ Petitioner versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Sharma and Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, Advocates : Mr. G.D. Mishra, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays as follows:-"In the facts and circumstances of the present case this Honble Court may pleased to: W.P.(C) 8204/2018 Page 1 of 3 a) Pass a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order(s)/direction(s) against the respondent, thereby directing or ordering the respondent to allow a period of 15 days to the petitioner to remove his machines, raw/furnished material out of the premises so sealed by the respondent i.e. premises bearing No.F-498, G/F, Khasra No.26/15, 16/1, 17/1, Gali No.3, W...
Hari Ram vs.lt. Governor, Nct of Delhi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgement:6. h August, 2018 + W.P.(C) 9821/2015 and CM No.23683/2015 (stay) HARI RAM ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Akhil Sachar, Advocate. versus LT. GOVERNOR, NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for L&B/LAC. Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel with Ms.Kajri Gupta, Advocate for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S. SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings pertaining to 1 Bigha of land of the petitioner comprised in khasra No.39/7, 8, 13 min, situated in the area of Village Pehladpur Bangar, National Capital Territory of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land), are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the W.P.(C) 9821/2015 Page 1 of 5 Right to Fair Com...
M/S National Highways Authority of India vs.m/s Pcl-Stico (Jv)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:19. h April, 2018 Pronounced on:6. h August, 2018 FAO(OS) 194/2017 and CM Nos.23594-95/2017 M/S NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA .Appellant Through: Mr.Vikas Goel Mr.Kunal Dutta, Advs. and versus M/S PCL-STICO (JV) Through : Dr.Amit Mr.K.Dileep George, Advs. ..... Respondent George, and Mr.Swaroop CORAM:-"HONBLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR % C. HARI SHANKAR, J.1. (JUDGMENT) Consequent on the bid, submitted by it, being approved by the appellant-National Highways Authority of India, the work of widening of the lane and strengthening of the existing two-lane carriageway of NH-5, from Ganjam to Sunkhala in Odisha was awarded to the respondent, vide Agreement dated 20th August, 2001. The time for completion of the work, in the agreement, was stipulated as 32 months. FAO(OS) 194/2017 Page 1 of 23 2. The disputes between the appellant and the respondent, which have led to the present appeal, essenti...
Hindustan Vidyut Products Ltd. Vs.delhi Transco Ltd. & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
$~ * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision : August 06, 2018 FAO (OS) 337/2007 HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCTS LTD. ..... Appellant Through Mr. B. Mohan and Mr. Siddharth versus Aggarwal, Advs. DELHI POWER COMPANY LTD. & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS and Ms.Palak Rohmetra, Advs. with Mr.Gaurav Gupta, GM (Legal) for R-1. Through Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat FAO (OS) 338/2007 HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCTS LTD. ..... Appellant Through Mr. B. Mohan and Mr. Siddharth versus Aggarwal, Advs. DELHI TRANSCO LTD. & ANR. Through Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat ........ RESPONDENTS and Ms.Palak Rohmetra, Advs. with Mr.Gaurav Gupta, GM (Legal) for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA JUDGMENT A.K. CHAWLA, J.Both the appeals in hand, preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter 'the Act'), FAO (OS) 3& 3Page 1 of 21 extend challenge to the judgment dated 25.07.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the two petitions bei...
M/S Icici Bank Limited vs.mamraj Tomar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO3142018 Judgment reserved on :31. t July, 2018 Date of decision :6. h August, 2018 M/S ICICI BANK LIMITED ..... Appellant. Through: Mr. Puneet Bhalla, Advocate Versus MAMRAJ TOMAR Through: .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. Vide the present appeal, the appellant assails the impugned order dated 30.05.2018 of the learned Trial Court in CS No.18whereby on a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery along with an application Under Order XL Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for appointment of a receiver to take over the possession of the vehicle, i.e., car make BEAT/LT bearing registration No.UP-16BA-3375, the learned Trial Court directed the issuance of the summons for settlement of issues along with the notice of the said application to the defendant returnable for 9.10.2018.2. The prayer made by the appellant herein as plaintiff to the said suit seeking appointment of an ex parte recei...
Lt. Col. Raj Kumar & Anr vs.ram Kumar Aggarwal & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:6. h August, 2018 RSA792018, CM No.20678/2018(for stay) LT. COL. RAJ KUMAR & ANR Through: Mr. Saurabh Jain, Adv. ..... Appellants Versus Through: None. RAM KUMAR AGGARWAL & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 This Second Appeal under Section 100 of the CPC impugns the ........ RESPONDENTS judgment and decree dated 6th January, 2018 [in RCA No.30/2016 (New No.61345/2016) of the Court of Additional District Judge-12, Central]. of dismissal of First Appeal under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the appellants against the judgment and decree [dated 18th July, 2012 in Suit No.1821/2008 (Unique Case ID No.0241C0581832007) of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (North)]. of dismissal of the suit filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the respondents/defendants.2. The appellants/plaintiffs, by the said suit, sought a declaration that the appellant/plaintiff no.2 Alok Kumar, who is the son of appellant/plaintiff...
Mange Ram vs.raj Kumar Yadav
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.630/2018 & CMs 31285/2018 (Stay) & 31286/2018 (Exemption) 6th August, 2018 % MANGE RAM Through: versus ..... Appellant Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, Advocate. Appellant in person. ..... Respondent RAJ KUMAR YADAV Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. A more or less identical issue between the same parties has been decided by this Court in terms of the judgment passed in RFA6232018 on 3.8.2018. The only difference in the present case would be with respect to the difference of the cheque numbers and amount. Therefore, adopting the ratio of the judgment dated 3.8.2018 in RFA6232018, this appeal is also dismissed. RFA6302018 Page 1 of 5 2. The judgment dated 3.8.2018 passed in RFA6232018 reads as under:-"CM No.30905/2018 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA No.623/2018 & CM No.30904/2018 (stay) 1. This Regular Firs...
Gita Rani vs.east Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
#56 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:06. 08.2018 W.P.(C) 8128/2018 GITA RANI ........ Petitioner versus EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr. Prashant Sharma and Mr. Amit Kumar Verma, Advocates : Mr. G.D. Mishra, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays as follows:-"In the facts and circumstances of the present case this Honble Court may pleased to: W.P.(C) 8128/2018 Page 1 of 3 a) Pass a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order(s)/direction(s) against the respondent, thereby directing or ordering the respondent to allow a period of 15 days to the petitioner to remove his machines, raw/furnished material out of the premises so sealed by the i.e. premises bearing H.No.10/53A, Shankar Gali, Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi-110032. r...
Mukesh Sharma vs.m/s Faces Cosmetics (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-06-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.628/2018 + % MUKESH SHARMA6h August, 2018 Through: Mr. G.C.Sharma and Mr. Bhola ..... Appellant Singh, Advocates. M/S FACES COSMETICS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondent versus CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No.31257/2018 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. RFA6282018 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC ) is filed by the plaintiff in the suit impugning the Judgment of the Trial Court dated 28.3.2018 by which RFA NO.628/2018 Page 1 of 3 the trial court has dismissed the suit for recovery of monies filed by the appellant/plaintiff for a sum of Rs.4,15,755/- along with interest.2. I need not narrate the facts in detail however, the limited facts which require attention are that the appellant/plaintiff claims to have been appointed as a dealer for the cosmetics/...